I know rent is bad in San Francisco, but this is ridiculous. Shuttle buses aren't making things worse. These "activists" are wasting a lot of people's time trying to blame the rent problems on anything they can, when the real culrpit is simple: tech companies in SF are paying people a lot of money, and everyone wants to live there. Sadly, no municipal legislation will fix that problem.

Wait, allowing people to work inside the city while commuting from outside the city drives up rents inside the city? How does that make any sense.

That's not what they're doing.

The busses are used to shuttle various tech company employees from where they live (in San Francisco), to work in other areas (Mountain View, Cupertino, etc).

The complaint is that these horrible, evil, highly paid tech workers can afford to live in San Francisco, and by doing so, they're driving up rents and forcing out the other people who "deserve" to live in San Francisco (and who have probably protested new construction as well). Very strong demand for housing units in San Francisco + basically no new housing units = rising rents.

Basically, it sounds like they want San Francisco to go back to a starving artists district.

I'm glad I'm not the only one seeing these protests as all sorts of stupid. Perhaps if these folks had jobs, they could live where they wanted to. But no, they spend their days being a nuisance. So do mosquitos, and they get chemical warfare... just sayin'!

That said, Google could easily solve the problem by setting up Corporate Housing. Buy some tract of land right next to the Googleplex, and give massive discounts for employees to live in corp. housing.

Also, a tip for would-be tech giants: moving to Silicon Valley just to have an address in that region is not a wise move. You're better off, really, finding new fertile ground. Seattle and Denver are good larger cities, but some smaller cities are attractive as well.

OK... First, those buses are reducing the environmental impact of thousands of commuters. Second, the problem isn't Silicon Valley hiring workers; that's the kind of thing you want to have happen in a local economy. The problem is ridiculous zoning laws preventing new housing from going up.

These protesters are idiots and are likely in favor of the existing laws.

Suing the buses in an "attempt to drive the tech folks out" is not a bright idea. If they want to live in a city, they can generally afford it. It's probably the intangible things that keeps them in SF anyways.

Meanwhile, if you annoy them enough to start driving cars, let's see how much smog that will generate.

"These buses are having devastating impacts on our neighborhoods, driving up rents and evictions of longtime San Francisco residents," Shortt told the SF Examiner.

Wait, allowing people to work inside the city while commuting from outside the city drives up rents inside the city? How does that make any sense.

Because the inverse is happening. Major tech companies build facilities in small exclusive communities like Mountain View and Cupertino, which then refuse to rezone to increase local stock. So the workers move to the closest affordable area, which happens to be SF.

Of course, that's just one facet of the mess - I recommend looking up the long form overview that TechCrunch did a few weeks back.

I had initially discarded the the protesters as a bunch of idiots who can't get anything done. Then I came across a very long and detailed article from Tech Crunch that makes people actually use some critical thinking about SFO. http://techcrunch.com/2014/04/14/sf-housing/

As one would expect it's not cut and dry. I'd love to see ars do some more indepth reporting on it, maybe pairing up with their sister publication Wired.

Wait, allowing people to work inside the city while commuting from outside the city drives up rents inside the city? How does that make any sense.

That's not what they're doing.

The busses are used to shuttle various tech company employees from where they live (in San Francisco), to work in other areas (Mountain View, Cupertino, etc).

The complaint is that these horrible, evil, highly paid tech workers can afford to live in San Francisco, and by doing so, they're driving up rents and forcing out the other people who "deserve" to live in San Francisco (and who have probably protested new construction as well). Very strong demand for housing units in San Francisco + basically no new housing units = rising rents.

Basically, it sounds like they want San Francisco to go back to a starving artists district.

I hate how people continually expand the use of buzzwords to the point they lose all meaning. Describing "rising rent" that causes people to move out as a negative "environmental impact" is too much of stretch for me... especially when in this case there is an obvious environment benefit (less air pollution, less traffic).

Sorry, but if the rent is becoming unaffordable for you, you're welcome to move somewhere more affordable. San Francisco is a very desirable place to live, more people wanting to move in is going to obviously drive up rates.

Former token presidential candidate. His platform was "the rent is too damn high". He never got further than that. Kind of like Ron Paul's answer to everything was "destroy it".

2 Runs for Mayor, 1 Run for Senator, and 1 for Governor. He actually runs as a Republic right now, it's actually a serious party, they just use a little bit of shock and theatrics to get out their relatively serious message.

What a desperate and stupid attack. Yes, let's put all those people back into cars, that will save the environment!

It's not an either/or problem. What the activists would like is to see 1) the localities which are externalising the costs of having major tech companies stop doing so and 2) for the companies to invest in solutions that benefit society as a whole, not just themselves. The Bay would benefit from a pan-Bay transit system like the NY MTA, but there are a lot of political and social reasons why the various attempts at building such have failed.

They are part of several drivers of a cyclical housing crisis in SFO enjoys. The fact that tech workers make a good chunk of money likely means the scenario has played out slightly faster than in previous cycles.

It's time for EVERY tech company to get together, buy land in the middle of nowhere, put in some cheap housing, take all the jobs and leave. Then when those whining bitches, bitch, no one will be around to hear them. Just stay away from the East Coast.

Or maybe use that facial recognition and license plate software, ID all the protesters and blackball them throughout the state. That big earthquake that has been talked about for so long can't come quick enough.

What a desperate and stupid attack. Yes, let's put all those people back into cars, that will save the environment!

It's not an either/or problem. What the activists would like is to see 1) the localities which are externalising the costs of having major tech companies stop doing so

In what regard? You can't force people not to live in SF.

Quote:

and 2) for the companies to invest in solutions that benefit society as a whole, not just themselves. The Bay would benefit from a pan-Bay transit system like the NY MTA, but there are a lot of political and social reasons why the various attempts at building such have failed.

So, this would be a moot point then? Since even if the companies wanted to do it, they would not be able to because of events outside of their control.

It's time for EVERY tech company to get together, buy land in the middle of nowhere, put in some cheap housing, take all the jobs and leave. Then when those whining bitches, bitch, no one will be around to hear them. Just stay away from the East Coast.

Or maybe use that facial recognition and license plate software, ID all the protesters and blackball them throughout the state. That big earthquake that has been talked about for so long can't come quick enough.

I don't know about every company, but GE did that last year in San Ramon by opening an Innovation Center there. When they opened up for resumes they got thousands the first day from people sick of the commuting to/from SFO.

I know rent is bad in San Francisco, but this is ridiculous. Shuttle buses aren't making things worse. These "activists" are wasting a lot of people's time trying to blame the rent problems on anything they can, when the real culrpit is simple: tech companies in SF are paying people a lot of money, and everyone wants to live there. Sadly, no municipal legislation will fix that problem.

The solution is tear out those old buildings and build new ones that accommodate more people. But the the so called environmentalist will have none of that! The bottom line, the underlying land is much more valuable than the old buildings sitting on it.

It is supply and demand. If you want rents to go down then you need more supply. Trying to prevent people from moving into that area to artificially depress demand is a ridiculous notion.

I know rent is bad in San Francisco, but this is ridiculous. Shuttle buses aren't making things worse. These "activists" are wasting a lot of people's time trying to blame the rent problems on anything they can, when the real culrpit is simple: tech companies in SF are paying people a lot of money, and everyone wants to live there. Sadly, no municipal legislation will fix that problem.

The solution is tear out those old buildings and build new ones that accommodate more people. But the the so called environmentalist will have none of that! The bottom line, the underlying land is much more valuable than the old buildings sitting on it.

It is supply and demand. If you want rents to go down then you need more supply. Trying to prevent people from moving into that area to artificially depress demand is a ridiculous notion.

What the locals are asking: "why do you have to live here. there is plenty of room elsewhere".

Also, they are concerned that at the next dot com bust their neighborhoods will be left a shell of its former self with nothing to show for it.

I'm surprised tech employers need to spend so much to shuttle their employees to and from work. They all must really like their daily scrum.

the price of free busses and free cafeterias and other bennies is you get to stay in the office until late at night, WORKING. if you have to worry about your commute then chances are you will leave earlier.

Also, a tip for would-be tech giants: moving to Silicon Valley just to have an address in that region is not a wise move. You're better off, really, finding new fertile ground. Seattle and Denver are good larger cities, but some smaller cities are attractive as well.

Lots of other cities would like to see tech companies sprout up. But venture capital, in particular, is not spreading as far and wide as some would like.

More VC money was handed out last year than at any time since 2001. But an even higher proportion is staying within California.

I had initially discarded the the protesters as a bunch of idiots who can't get anything done. Then I came across a very long and detailed article from Tech Crunch that makes people actually use some critical thinking about SFO. http://techcrunch.com/2014/04/14/sf-housing/

As one would expect it's not cut and dry. I'd love to see ars do some more indepth reporting on it, maybe pairing up with their sister publication Wired.

Holy shit does that ever look thorough. I haven't had time to go through it yet but thanks for the link!